Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Communications Law
Unfit For Prime Time: Why Cable Television Regulations Cannot Perform Trinko's 'Antitrust Function', Keith Klovers
Unfit For Prime Time: Why Cable Television Regulations Cannot Perform Trinko's 'Antitrust Function', Keith Klovers
Michigan Law Review
Until recently, regulation and antitrust law operated in tandem to safeguard competition in regulated industries. In three recent decisions-Trinko, Credit Suisse, and Linkline-the Supreme Court limited the operation of the antitrust laws when regulation "performs the antitrust function." This Note argues that cable programming regulations-which are in some respects factually similar to the telecommunications regulations at issue in Trinko and Linkline-do not perform the antitrust function because they cannot deter anticompetitive conduct. As a result, Trinko and its siblings should not foreclose antitrust claims for damages that arise out of certain cable programming disputes.
American Broadcasting And The First Amendment, René L. Todd
American Broadcasting And The First Amendment, René L. Todd
Michigan Law Review
A Review of American Broadcasting and the First Amendment by Lucas A. Powe, Jr.
Misregulating Television: Network Dominance And The Fcc, Robert R. Morse Jr.
Misregulating Television: Network Dominance And The Fcc, Robert R. Morse Jr.
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Misregulating Television: Network Dominance and the FCC by Stanley M. Besen, Thomas G. Krattenmaker, A. Richard Metzger, Jr. and John R. Woodbury
The Power Of The Fcc To Regulate Newspaper-Broadcast Cross-Ownership: The Need For Congressional Clarification, Michigan Law Review
The Power Of The Fcc To Regulate Newspaper-Broadcast Cross-Ownership: The Need For Congressional Clarification, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The controversy surrounding the FCC's Second Report and . Order, its appeal, and the subsequent decision in NCCB raises basic questions concerning the statutory authority of the FCC to promulgate rules concerning newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership. This Note suggests that the FCC, notwithstanding judicial affirmation in NCCB of the Commission's authority to adopt such rules, might well be exercising more authority than Congress intended it to possess under the Communications Act of 1934. This Note therefore concludes that, irrespective of the merits of the Second Report and Order, Congress should reexamine and clarify the scope of the FCC's power in this regard.
The Fcc Computer Inquiry: Interfaces Of Competitive And Regulated Markets, Michigan Law Review
The Fcc Computer Inquiry: Interfaces Of Competitive And Regulated Markets, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Since the advent of computer technology, data processing and communication services have become increasingly interdependent. In 1966, the Federal Communications Commission launched the Computer Inquiry to explore the broad range of regulatory and policy problems generated by this technological development.2